.github/ has an ISSUE_TEMPLATE directory but no pull_request_template.md, so pull request descriptions start from an empty box.
The conventions already exist in CONTRIBUTING.md and CLAUDE.md: a title that reads like a commit subject, a few sentences of plain English on what changed and why, no arguing the case, and an explicit call-out of anything a reviewer would otherwise have to discover — breaking API changes, migrations, deployment steps, dependencies deliberately held back. A template would put that in front of contributors while they are writing, rather than in a file they have to know to read.
Worth deciding as part of this: whether the template also carries the migration and deployment call-outs as prompts, or leaves them to prose so the box does not turn into a checklist people tick without reading.
.github/has anISSUE_TEMPLATEdirectory but nopull_request_template.md, so pull request descriptions start from an empty box.The conventions already exist in CONTRIBUTING.md and CLAUDE.md: a title that reads like a commit subject, a few sentences of plain English on what changed and why, no arguing the case, and an explicit call-out of anything a reviewer would otherwise have to discover — breaking API changes, migrations, deployment steps, dependencies deliberately held back. A template would put that in front of contributors while they are writing, rather than in a file they have to know to read.
Worth deciding as part of this: whether the template also carries the migration and deployment call-outs as prompts, or leaves them to prose so the box does not turn into a checklist people tick without reading.